Calgarypuck Moderator Team

[zamler]

I like how the poster who brought up how info on # of reports can be used against others being problematic is the same one who immediately used that info to take a jab at another poster.

It’s a wonderful world.

That was intentional and it proved my point. We have selective data (normally private) which can be used against (or for) someone. I say either make ALL such data public or none.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

there was a mod forum where all infractions get publicly posted for all mods to read and comment. If a mod oversteps, all the other mods will know. .

We have this. A mod has no ability to give someone an infraction without the rest of the mods knowing.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

The ignore feature is not intended to replace moderating or poisonous discussions. Its intended to prevent posters stalking other posters. For example, for all the dogpiling we see on Calgaryblood, you would think if he's not violating the rules with his posts, more people would simply ignore him. Instead they rather wait for him to post and then attack with replies. Like it's his fault people are always butthurt when they have the option to ignore him? Hell, I sometimes see comments like "you're always spewing off negative garbage..." And wonder why an IGNORE feature hasn't been used?!? If you're always reading it stuff your don't like, who's the fool? I simply value my time too much to spend it reading #### I don't like. Its that simple.

Maybe the function doesn't exist here, but at HF we would just force-ignore two guys always at each other's throats.

I'm pretty sure the ignore feature is there to not see posts you dont want to see regardless of the reason why

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by jammies

Sometimes a poster being singled out for multiple criticisms isn't bullying, but the recognition that the person is a terrible poster, who contributes only noise, by multiple people independently. People become annoyed by a particularly obtuse post, and reply to it without going further into the thread and seeing that it is already addressed by others. Then the original poster doubles down on their bafflegab, usually being the type that is more interested in talking that listening, and the process repeats.

Internet bullying certainly exists, but I fail to see how one can be bullied effectively when each of us is anonymous to a great degree. Further, certain users that return under different names and have each new account become the target of "bullying" should look at their own actions first, last, and always. I suppose you could call that victim-blaming, but first you have to believe that people not agreeing with you and thinking you're not too clever because of what you write, and how you present yourself, makes you a victim.

Sent from my ASUS_Z01BDC using Tapatalk

Admins to any website can track IP addresses. Unless new registrants are getting a new cell phone or laptop every few months, its pretty easy to uncover who's registering as an existing banned member.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by stone hands

I'm pretty sure the ignore feature is there to not see posts you dont want to see regardless of the reason why

Only if you log-in. So what, random lurkers who are thinking about getting a membership have to skim through pages of poisonous discussion because they don't have the ignore feature? Again, ignores are not intended to replace moderating. A page should not broadcast a bunch of rule violations and the only hope for members is that people are ignoring each other properly.

[GGG]

I think two things would help with transparency of moderation.

1) when someone reports a post a pm with the resolution is sent back to them. It can be we feel that this post was accpetable, or we warned the poster but left the post or we deleted the post. Just having this feedback will give the perception that something is being done rather than the current perception that reporting is a black hole.

2) A brief reason when someone is banned or suspended in a locked forum that doesn't allow comments. Transparency in these types of things makes people more comfortable with the decisions even if they disagree with them.

[stone hands]

the acceptable level of toxic, poisonous discussion is in the eye of the beholder. This is bar none the most civil and heavily moderated forum i have ever come to and the suggestion that the mods idly sit by and let posters troll each other into oblivion is a hilarious read on the situation, personally. Just because a few people with a severe lack of self awareness have stated the site is out to get them and the mods are complicit, doesnt mean thats the case

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by stone hands

I'm pretty sure the ignore feature is there to not see posts you dont want to see regardless of the reason why

Except it's useless as it does not continue to block said post of poster when quoted. And the folks I have chosen to block get quoted a ridiculous amount of time. So what is the point of the ignore feature if it does not do its intended function to its fullest.

[Locke]

Gifs and difficult jobs aside, I do believe we have to get back to the topic of transparency.

The lack of it is what got this thread started in the first place and its continued absence is going to fabricate the need for another thread just like it down the road.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Except it's useless as it does not continue to block said post of poster when quoted. And the folks I have chosen to block get quoted a ridiculous amount of time. So what is the point of the ignore feature if it does not do its intended function to its fullest.

how about all of those times posts arent quoted

or your ability to scroll past posts of people you have put on ignore who have been quoted

[jammies]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Admins to any website can track IP addresses. Unless new registrants are getting a new cell phone or laptop every few months, its pretty easy to uncover who's registering as an existing banned member.

It's a little more complex than getting a new device, but suffice to say that banning via IP is easily gotten around. Even forcing users to link their accounts with social media can be spoofed for someone with sufficient motivation. It is far harder, however, to change style, attitude, and favorite issues. Many times a returnee will manage to disguise those three attributes for a short while, but as time goes on and the fear of discovery fades, it becomes obvious.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by jammies

It's a little more complex than getting a new device, but suffice to say that banning via IP is easily gotten around. Even forcing users to link their accounts with social media can be spoofed for someone with sufficient motivation. It is far harder, however, to change style, attitude, and favorite issues. Many times a returnee will manage to disguise those three attributes for a short while, but as time goes on and the fear of discovery fades, it becomes obvious.

I know! Liverpool is the best and Spiderman 3 was the worst!

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Wild GM

We have this. A mod has no ability to give someone an infraction without the rest of the mods knowing.

But is there an extra secret mod forum where the cooler mods talk about the newbie mods or the out-of-the-loop mods? And if you answer 'no', do you secretly worry that you're just not in the cool mod group?

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Locke

I know! Liverpool is the best and Spiderman 3 was the worst!

Everyone has their tells... those are a couple of yours. How long do you think a returnee 4x4 would last without lapsing into ranting about terrible drivers?

There probably are at least one or two returnees who manage to completely obfuscate their previous personas. However, that would serve the ultimate purpose of modifying their unacceptable behaviour, so that might be considered more a win than a problem.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by Dion

Pin a medal on that poster

There are posters that have gotten infractions for reporting too many posts.

By the by, I would have quoted mike's post, but I'm unable to. I can quote his other ones, just not the 46 one. Weird.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by stone hands

how about all of those times posts arent quoted

or your ability to scroll past posts of people you have put on ignore who have been quoted

Then why have an ignore feature at all then if all you have to is scroll down. What a silly argument that is that gets trotted around all too often.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Wild GM

A lot more than 2!
46!
Which actually we thank you for. We always say to please report and you certainly do! :-)

Originally Posted by squiggs96

There are posters that have gotten infractions for reporting too many posts.

By the by, I would have quoted mike's post, but I'm unable to. I can quote his other ones, just not the 46 one. Weird.

Well I'm confused.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Then why have an ignore feature at all then if all you have to is scroll down. What a silly argument that is that gets trotted around all too often.

Because unless someone quotes them, it ignores the post?

And in the off chance someone quotes someone you have ignored, you can just scroll past?

What’s silly is being upset forum software can’t protect you from yourself by getting baited into responding to something because you can’t let someone on the internet make a statement you don’t agree with without getting incensed/feel compelled to reply

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by zamler

Well I'm confused.

There have been isolated cases of infractions being given out in instances where a user has abused the reporting feature.
Tough to get into specifics without revealing ...well...specifics.

[CaptainCrunch]

I think that my tough guy reputation in this virtual yard that we call CP is lacking. Maybe I need to get some infractions by finding a way to virtually shank some users. Because getting a facial tattoo might not be enough to get my respect in the yard.

Now give me your lunch money fish.